Technologies play acrucial role in this

people have reflexive understanding of the rules. To engage in the
“design” of an organization means
to address and reflect on these
rules, whereas designing a technological artifact is done according to
laws that correspond to the natural
sciences. Because normative rules
are reflexively understood and
produced by people, any “design” of
the rules necessarily involves the
people they affect. Thus, no one can
design an organization for someone
else. The only thing that someone
can do for another is to design
representations and constraints
such as formal roles, staffing, processes, and hierarchical structures.
Designing an organization therefore
involves other activities, such as
supporting members of the organization in reflecting and bringing
attention to the normative rules of
their own organization.

Despite this important distinc-tion, these two applications ofdesign have much in common.There appears to be a basic way offraming the important elements ofwhat it means to design. Scholarshave named this design thinkingand design attitude. Nigel Crossalso used the phrase “designerlyways of knowing.”First of all, design embodies adistinct epistemology. Schön con-trasted it with the dominant epis-temology of technical rationality,which emphasizes rational problemsolving based on theory and sci-ence [ 1]. On the other hand, actualprofessional practices in generaland design practices in particularembody reflection-in-action. Thismeans designers face each uniquesituation and, at the same time, seeit as something familiar. Throughthis, they frame the situation andtest successive frames by takingactions experimentally and reframethe situation based on what theylearn. To many in management,this kind of practice appears unsta-ble and subjective.

learning, although, aswe’ve emphasized,technologies are onlya means, not an end.

We therefore need tobroaden the roleof technology.

Technology can be atool for learningdesign thinking andfacilitating culturalchange.

in abstract. In each instance of
detailed parts (e.g., technical features, roles, communication, work
processes, language, documents),
strategies become salient, emerging
over time, often in ways that are
not intended, ultimately impacting
interpersonal behavior.

Fourth, design involves power
relations. Buchanan claimed that
design is rhetorical, as “the art of
conceiving and planning products,”
which are “vehicles of argument
and persuasion about the desirable
qualities of private and public life”
[ 4]. We have experienced the process of design in an organization as
a political process. One group tries